Trouble logging in?If you can't remember your password or are having trouble logging in, you will have to reset your password. If you have trouble resetting your password (for example, if you lost access to the original email address), please do not start posting with a new account, as this is against the forum rules. If you create a temporary account, please contact us right away via Forum Support, and send us any information you can about your original account, such as the account name and any email address that may have been associated with it.

I think maybe you guys should split the idea into two things: Things which are a lie and things that are a misrepresentation.

So you can have 4x the possibilites rather than 2x.

You can:

Lie and misrepresent things.
Lie but not misrepresent.
Tell the truth but misrepresent.
Tell the truth and not misrepresent.

Seems like some of you are talking about factual truth vs. factual incorrectness whereas others are talking about trying to represent vs. misrepresent things.

In my opinion, the most interesting situation is where people tell the truth to misrepresent. How this is usually done is a person tells a truth, but just not the whole truth. There's some gap in the knowledge of the listener or the listener has some pre-conceived notion.

I think what people are having problems with is where you can lie, that is state something factually incorrect and not misrepresent. And this part is hard to distinguish with a lie and a misrepresentation. The difference being that through the lie, the person is trying to convey new information, without trying to tell the truth.

So Obi-wan is clearly lying. However, he was basically giving advice to Luke to the effect that what he would have thought as his real father was dead. He was trying to present to him what would really happen if Luke tried to get in contact with his father. (Of course, that was from Obi-wan's point of view, that Vader was beyond redemption, so that was his representation.)

The difference between the two is when people are trying to represent things to you in a certain way, you should not simply dismiss it as simply a lie. You have to get around the lie and see what they're actually saying. And yes, they are being coy or deceptive for a reason, but the intent is there whether it was well founded or not.

Edit: Oh also, if people ARE lying *and* misrepresenting things, that too is useful. It's useful to know why they're doing these things, unless of course they're sociopaths that lie at the drop of the hat for rather boring reasons... In other words, it is most interesting when people lie...

I guess the general idea is that the even the red truth is true according to the rules of Beatrice's world and therefore based on her interpretation of things.
Likely, the fact she believes in Witches would allow her to declare in red that witches exist, because this is a milestone of her world although witches don't exist for real or don't exist in the real world.

On the other side Battler can't declare in red he was born by Asumu either because he's in Beatrice's world and she denied him the chance to use that sentence in its metaphorical meaning (as in 'Asumu raised me and influenced my grown a lot and therefore gave birth to the persona I am') or because in Battler's world that sentence had to be taken litterally and therefore couldn't be considered true.

Now yes, this trick implies deception by Beatrice. Sure, she might have hoped for Battler to see though this deception too and finally look at things from the point of view of her world or she might have been unable to see her own deception as she really believed in her red truth to be true as her perception of the world was messed up though Beatrice proved she is aware of how things work in the human world so I'll discharge this idea.

However, if Beatrice is aware she's tricking Battler in my eyes her trickery look even worse due to all that rambling we had in Ep 5 about Battler believing in her red truth because he trusted her. All that cute talking about building up trust and shy love and so on to discover that Beatrice tricked Battler again, again proving he's not suposed to trust her?

Call it a personal preference but I don't really like it.

All in all I would have preferred Beatrice had proved herself trustworthy at least in the matter of the red truth.

...isn't true at all. Beatrice knows exactly what witches are, so this is a misrepresentation of her worldview.

Quote:

On the other side Battler can't declare in red he was born by Asumu either because he's in Beatrice's world and she denied him the chance to use that sentence in its metaphorical meaning (as in 'Asumu raised me and influenced my grown a lot and therefore gave birth to the persona I am') or because in Battler's world that sentence had to be taken litterally and therefore couldn't be considered true.

Then she's cheating. Different people are allowed to do different things with the Red purely because of the mood she's in at the time.

Quote:

However, if Beatrice is aware she's tricking Battler in my eyes her trickery look even worse due to all that rambling we had in Ep 5 about Battler believing in her red truth because he trusted her. All that cute talking about building up trust and shy love and so on to discover that Beatrice tricked Battler again, again proving he's not suposed to trust her?

Call it a personal preference but I don't really like it.

Yes, EXACTLY. The worst part is that this development makes Beatrice into an unrepentant hypocrite.

...isn't true at all. Beatrice knows exactly what witches are, so this is a misrepresentation of her worldview.

But we don't have 'Beatrice's definition of witches' when she uses that world.
She probably knows what death means also but she uses the world according to a meaning of her chosing and not of the most logic one. I wouldn't be surprised if she were to pull out the same trick with witches.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

Then she's cheating. Different people are allowed to do different things with the Red purely because of the mood she's in at the time.

Yes, she is. Or she's making as rule that 'according to my personal feelings I can change the rules without warning you beforehand so either you can read in my mind or you'll have to hope in a miracle to figure the rules out'. Actually I'll call this rule cheating too... -_-

By the way has someone figured out why she didn't want to say that Kanon died of murder or suicide in EP 1?
If Kanon ceased to exist due to someone else's will it was murder, if it was due to his own will it was suicide. Or wasn't Kanon's death confirmed? I can't remember if it was confirmed in red...

Quote:

Originally Posted by AuraTwilight

Yes, EXACTLY. The worst part is that this development makes Beatrice into an unrepentant hypocrite.

*nods* Exactly. It makes harder to look at Beatrice with love if she's a person that's not worth any trust.
Though Battler realized he couldn't blindly believe her words and asked for definitions for the 'closed room' thing the fact that her definition matched with how one would normally define it made me hope we didn't need to check any word she used.

It turned out this is wrong and that actually, for everything she said, we should have used the dictionary 'Beatrice language-real world language' and checked the definition of each word. Sadly this doesn't make her look any better... -_-

Well the only way this statement can be plausibly read that makes any sense or is in any capacity useful is "the truth value of anything I state in red is true."

The problem comes in the subjective definition of the foundational premises that determine truth or falsehood. Since it's prose, formal logic can't really work out exactly. Unfortunately, the idea that the writer is trying to get as close to a formal definition as possible appears to have been wrong, and thus the foundation is a universe unlike our own.

But we don't have 'Beatrice's definition of witches' when she uses that world.
She probably knows what death means also but she uses the world according to a meaning of her chosing and not of the most logic one. I wouldn't be surprised if she were to pull out the same trick with witches.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Renall

Well the only way this statement can be plausibly read that makes any sense or is in any capacity useful is "the truth value of anything I state in red is true."

If I understood correctly, the idea of the red truth being used for lying is solely based on the fact that she can declare Kanon and Shannon dead, right?!
Now I know I have gone over this just a few posts ago, but why do we believe in an elusive 19th (technically even 20th) person, Yasu, who plays the part of 4 characters instead of just going with the idea that those characters exist in the stories and Yasu does not?!
Beato was able to tell red truth about mostly any murder in the four games, yet it's highly unlikely that some characters died 4 fundamentally different deaths over the course of 2 days. So the way of dying is fictional, so why not fictionalize certain emotions into different characters as long as they hint towards an actuall conflict. What better way to hide yourself in a story than to split yourself up?!

If Kanon and Shannon actually existed in the stories their death might be fictional but not a lie. It's just as fictional as being able to declare in red that Ushiromiya Eva is dead, because Eva is not dead in the real world...but that doesn't concern fictional Eva.

If I understood correctly, the idea of the red truth being used for lying is solely based on the fact that she can declare Kanon and Shannon dead, right?!

No. It's a more fundamental issue than that. It just happens to spring from that particular example.

The Battler/Asumu thing is another, Shkanon-independent example of the inconsistencies of the whole thing. The problem is the arbitrary nature of what kind of thing can be declared true and who can and can't do it. It has no foundation in anything but authorial whim, and that whim is not consistent.

Also the notion that the characters are fictional isn't lost on anybody, I don't think. It's not a question of whether they're characters, but what those characters are or are not permitted to do.

But we don't have 'Beatrice's definition of witches' when she uses that world.

Yes, we do.

Quote:

She probably knows what death means also but she uses the world according to a meaning of her chosing and not of the most logic one. I wouldn't be surprised if she were to pull out the same trick with witches.

Unfortunately, the idea that the writer is trying to get as close to a formal definition as possible appears to have been wrong, and thus the foundation is a universe unlike our own.

This.

Umineko did a lot of exploring its own definition of "truth", and took a lot of subjective angles toward it. Cat box=multiple truths. Newer truths rewriting older truths etc. Erika became the "Witch of Truth" briefly. There was also the 一つなる真実の書 (Book of All One Truth a.k.a. Eva's diary) which Ange read and rejected. Were there any other parts about redefining truth that I've forgotten here.

The Battler/Asumu thing is another, Shkanon-independent example of the inconsistencies of the whole thing. The problem is the arbitrary nature of what kind of thing can be declared true and who can and can't do it. It has no foundation in anything but authorial whim, and that whim is not consistent.

Which is where I'd disagree. I have yet to be shown a red truth that is incosistent with the definition of truth in any way, based on the reality within the story presented to us.
Battler was not born by Asumu. This is true. If Shannon and Kanon are two different breathing entities within the stories, there is no logical flaw here...at least I don't see one. The Battler over which a battle was fought was more than plot-Battler, but be it plot- or meta-Battler both aren't born by Asumu.
So, if Shannon and Kanon exist in the flesh on the gameboard, Kanon is dead or Shannon is dead is not more or less true than Battler being unable to say that he was born by Asumu.

If there had been a red truth that Shannon or Kanon were born by Beatrice or Kinz˘...I'd agree. But I don't remember any such thing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wanderer

Umineko did a lot of exploring its own definition of "truth", and took a lot of subjective angles toward it. Cat box=multiple truths. Newer truths rewriting older truths etc. Erika became the "Witch of Truth" briefly. There was also the 一つなる真実の書 (Book of All One Truth a.k.a. Eva's diary) which Ange read and rejected. Were there any other parts about redefining truth that I've forgotten here.

Actually the things that Umineko highlighted against each other was, how truth can be approached from different angles. It takes truth not as a universal value or a moral construct, but simply as another word for reality, so you could say that it differentiates between 現実 (genjitsu: reality) and 真実 (shinjitsu: truth). Shinjitsu in this case being nothing more than a subjective notion of how Genjitsu is perceived and reworked into a personal framework.

I think the problem that we run into, if they are flesh and blood on the gameboard, is that flesh and blood can die. And once flesh and blood dies, they can't continue to move around and do stuff.

I think ever since we've seen Kanon do stuff after he's been declared dead, we've been trying to get around the red and figure out why he's able to do so.

You know, maybe we can consider Shannon to be flesh and blood, but Kanon to be a persona only, on the gameboard? I know Kanon's been declared dead a lot, but has Shannon been declared dead with as much certainty but she gets back up and starts moving around? I think there were some declarations, but were they as specific as Kanon's?

If they arent, then it could be, yes, on Rokkenjima Prime it's Yasu -> Shkabeatrice. But on the gameboard it could be simplified to Shannon is Kanon, but Shannon is real.

EDIT: Hmmm... it seems to be that the only real red that is a problem from EP1-6 is from Episode 3:6 people: Kinzo, Genji, Shannon, Kanon, Gohda, and Kumasawa are dead!

Actually, in episode 3, could Shannon already be deader than a doorknob right at the beginning (or soon after, when the red was discussed.) Did they say they clearly saw Kanon or could Kanon not really have been in the chapel? How does this fit in with Will's solution? And if they are both really dead, then it's not Kanon who killed Nanjo and led Jessica out at the end then?

In the other episodes, it's really only Kanon that is declared 'killed' rather than dead with the red, until the point when Shannon is also dead. Episode 6 is the most clear of this where Shannon was explicitly named to be in one room but, 'everyone else' was declared to be in another room. It felt like a convenient dodge by the author even if Meta-Battler said he was okay with naming Kanon in the room. Ultimately, he didn't. 8) This allows Kanon to not exist in the other room.

I think the problem that we run into, if they are flesh and blood on the gameboard, is that flesh and blood can die. And once flesh and blood dies, they can't continue to move around and do stuff.

But THAT is the trick that we are supposed to figure out isn't it?! How is a person that is supposed to be dead, has been declared dead and who we have seen to be killed able to move around and meet up with people?
We learn that the name Kanon is exclusive to the person who was given the name Kanon, yet Kanon is dead and Kanon appeared in front of the servants. This is nothing else than Kumasawa turning into a witch or the witch Beatrice calling Battler from the study...it's a problem which we have to think around and reinvent so that it doesn't need magic, only that this one works on a more substantial level than for example a magically locked door.

EDIT:

Quote:

How does this fit in with Will's solution? And if they are both really dead, then it's not Kanon who killed Nanjo and led Jessica out after all then?

Will's solution exists beside this problem. Beginning and end overlap is merely a way to say that Kinz˘ was thrown in the furnace first and it all ended when Shannon was killed in the parlour. Of course the solution is different and needs a reinterpretation of events, but in the magical narrative of Umineko the witch Beatrice killed both Kanon and Shannon, locked them in different places and thus removed them from the game. In the end she revived Kanon and made him save Jessica. It was the black witch who killed Nanj˘.
This, in my opinion, isn't a simple "exchange Eva-Shkannontrice for Yasu and you've got the solution" thing. It's necessary to understand the basic principles of the gameboards to restructure the whole plot and make sense of it. The way I understand it magic does exist in the basic narrative (just like we are shown Shannon having tea-time with Beatrice, Kinz˘ rambling in his study and so on), these things do happen, we have to understand how this could work in terms of a realistic understanding of the events on Rokkenjima. Basically the killings of the family members in a way they weren't killed is no less "fantasy" than a person being split into different characters.

Did she define magic then? And even if she did I guess she could construct the sentence using a word she didn't define and that would mislead who would hear her. Since she doesn't have to follow standard definitions for words either we check all the words in her sentence or she can always find a way out should she want to since she doesn't have to stick to our rules.

Anyway the point is: if she can use subjective interpreation for the red truths, she could say almost everything in red.
Really, if red can be used subjectively it's not that much different from fantasy scenes...

But THAT is the trick that we are supposed to figure out isn't it?! How is a person that is supposed to be dead, has been declared dead and who we have seen to be killed able to move around and meet up with people?

Because somebody lied about it. Only this time, it was the very person whose honor was at stake, rather than ordinary players who have no reason to care about being honest.

Being told someone is dead then shown that they are not means that, surprise, you were lied to. "Oh, but it wasn't the definition of 'dead' you thought it was!" is little more than a pathetic cop out. It smacks of Jon Lovitz's pathological liar character, weakly searching about for an explanation that works on the basis of the outrageous things he's already said. It's a... some sorta... locked room farce.

Because somebody lied about it. Only this time, it was the very person whose honor was at stake, rather than ordinary players who have no reason to care about being honest.

Being told someone is dead then shown that they are not means that, surprise, you were lied to. "Oh, but it wasn't the definition of 'dead' you thought it was!" is little more than a pathetic cop out. It smacks of Jon Lovitz's pathological liar character, weakly searching about for an explanation that works on the basis of the outrageous things he's already said. It's a... some sorta... locked room farce.

Come to think of it, perhaps Ryukishi invented a new genre after all.

Hmm...
Isn't whether she "lied" not really the best question to ask anyway, but whether she spoke the truth? Regardless of what you believe "truth" means in normal life, within Umineko the meaning of "truth" was clearly redefined, or at least had a clearly ambiguous definition.

Being told someone is dead then shown that they are not means that, surprise, you were lied to. "Oh, but it wasn't the definition of 'dead' you thought it was!" is little more than a pathetic cop out. It smacks of Jon Lovitz's pathological liar character, weakly searching about for an explanation that works on the basis of the outrageous things he's already said. It's a... some sorta... locked room farce.

But that is what I am getting at, it is ot the definition of dead that was changed in the slightest, it is asking you to find a magic-less solution to the question how a dead character can walk around.
Of course I can't say for sure that my interpretation is true, but so far it has to be proven wrong. When Shannon and Kanon died, there is no lie, no different definition. They.are.dead.

This is true. If Shannon and Kanon are two different breathing entities within the stories, there is no logical flaw here...at least I don't see one. The Battler over which a battle was fought was more than plot-Battler, but be it plot- or meta-Battler both aren't born by Asumu.
So, if Shannon and Kanon exist in the flesh on the gameboard, Kanon is dead or Shannon is dead is not more or less true than Battler being unable to say that he was born by Asumu.

This is a lot of ifs. What if what you're supposing isn't true?

Your entire argument is that this deception doesn't exist because of an idea you decided to believe in despite there being no textual evidence.

and lots of evidence against it, like the entirety of EP7.

Quote:

Did she define magic then? And even if she did I guess she could construct the sentence using a word she didn't define and that would mislead who would hear her. Since she doesn't have to follow standard definitions for words either we check all the words in her sentence or she can always find a way out should she want to since she doesn't have to stick to our rules.

We're given two definitions of magic; the one Battler is told to disprove as his victory condition is the magic that lets you do things that disobey the laws of nature and do impossible things.

Otherwise she fucking lied to him about his own fucking win condition, making this EVEN WORSE.

Quote:

Anyway the point is: if she can use subjective interpreation for the red truths, she could say almost everything in red.
Really, if red can be used subjectively it's not that much different from fantasy scenes...

Exactly.

Quote:

But that is what I am getting at, it is ot the definition of dead that was changed in the slightest, it is asking you to find a magic-less solution to the question how a dead character can walk around.

If you are able to walk around, you're not dead. That's what the word means. You can no longer do shit. You are deceased. Shannon and Kanon are being given a magical loophole death that is called death but isn't actually death so they can bullshit the whole game just to fuck with Battler and the reader.